Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

'Mar

a government rightfully administered under its authority could
protect itself against itself and against the world."
shall's fame," said Judge Story, "will follow on to the distant
ages. Even if the constitution of this country should perish, his
glorious judgments will still remain to instruct mankind until
liberty shall cease to be a blessing and the science of juris-
prudence shall vanish from the catalogue of human pursuits."
It is hoped that every member of this Association will
actively aid in fitting celebration of John Marshall Day.

INTERNATIONAL BUREAU FOR THE UNIFICATION OF THE
LAW.

Civilized nations teach and are taught by each other. While striving each for its own material advancement, alive to its own interest, active in self-aggrandizement, it is an encouraging sign that the great Powers meet in frequent Conferences and International Congresses. In the arts and sciences, in the field of invention, in medicine and in the law of nations, opinions are interchanged, debate had and one learns from the other to the mutual advantage of all.

If in these comparatively unimportant matters there is to be this peaceful conflict of minds, of how much greater value would it be if the nations of the world could learn of each other the better methods and the best results to be obtained by and from legislation.

The advantages derivable from the study of comparative law cannot be overestimated. Intelligent comparison would inevitably lead to the selection of the fittest and the adoption by all of that which is the best product of the law makers. The crude and experimental would give way to the tried and proven. Unification of many of the laws incident to trading intercourse, governing commercial paper, regulating the collection of debts and the enforcement of contracts and the like would surely come and with it better mercantile relations, less of ruinous conflict and useless and expensive litigation. In Markby's treatise on the Elements of Law, he says that that

which elevates law into a science is that "we seek in the law and literature of other countries, enlightenment as to the law of our own, and with this aid we endeavor to acquire and to express our legal principles and to define accurately our technical terms." Comparison alone leads to appreciation of that which is good and just and inevitably brings us to the correction of that which is bad.

The example set by this Association in its efforts to bring about unification of the laws of the states is bearing fruit. Your President lately received from Honorable John Hay, Secretary of State, the following letter:

"DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, July 21, 1900. The Honorable Charles F. Manderson, President of the American Bar Association, Omaha, Nebraska.

SIR-This Department has received a dispatch from the United States Ambassador at Paris, submitting an interesting Memoradum prepared by Mr. Edmond Kelly, a delegate from the United States to the international Congress of Law now sitting at Paris, in which he sets forth considerations regarding the creation of an International Bureau for the collection and utilization of the world's legislation.

Inasmuch as your Association is doing for this country substantially what Mr. Kelly proposed should be done by a Central Bureau with respect to the legislation of the states of the world, I have the honor to enclose herewith for your consideration copies of General Porter's dispatch and its accompanying memorandum.

The Department understands that one of the aims of the American Bar Association is to accomplish a unification of the laws of the several states, through the proposal by the Association of a uniform law on a given subject, which project of law is then, through the several state Bar Associations, submitted to their legislatures and its passage urged. The conception of the creation and object of the projected Interna

tional Bureau appears therefore to be a development of the American idea.

It is appreciated that the collection and publication of the principal pieces of legislation of the civilized states of the world from year to year by a Central Bureau might greatly facilitate the study of comparative jurisprudence, and by its enlightening influence tend to the amelioration of the common law, as well as of the municipal law of nations.

Before, however, instructing General Porter in the matter, an expression of your views on the general proposition is requested.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

JOHN HAY."

Accompanying this was the first enclosure as follows: "EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES, PARIS, June 30, 1900. SIR-Mr. Edmond Kelly, who, as the Department is aware, acts occasionally as Counsel to this Embassy and who is a lawyer, well versed in international law, desires me to submit to you the enclosed memorandum regarding the creation of a Central Bureau having for its object the collecting and the utilization of material of annual legislation over the entire world with the view of unifying the law. Mr. Kelly suggests, therefore, that a proposition be introduced in the Congress of International Law, now sitting in Paris and of which he is a delegate for the United States, inviting all the nations of the world to hold a Congress in Paris during the year 1901, for the purpose of creating a bureau on the line. indicated by him and represents that such a proposition would have more weight if the State Department were to express some approval of the plan. I commend Mr. Kelly's suggestion to your attention.

I have, etc.

HORACE PORTER.

The memorandum referred to in Ambassador Porter's letter as coming from Mr. Edmond Kelly is as follows:

MEMORANDUM.

REGARDING PROPOSALS TO THE CONGRESS ON COMPARATIVE LAW, SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT.

There are numerous associations now engaged in the study of comparative law; some of them are composed of practicing lawyers, as in the "Société de Legislation Comparee" of the City of Paris; some form part of a university, as in the Columbian University at Washington. All bodies now engaged in the study of comparative law are confronted by two difficulties:

1o. As to the collection of their material.

2°. As to the application of the material when collected.

I. AS REGARDS COLLECTION OF MATERIAL.

It is practically impossible for the professor of an American University to make an intelligent abstract of the legislation. of a foreign country, owing to the ignorance under which he must labor regarding the conditions which made this legislation necessary.. I myself experienced this difficulty when engaged as a member of the "Société de Legislation Comparee" in making an abstract of the legislation of my own state of New York, in spite of the fact that I was not unfamiliar with the decisions of the courts and the political situation there; and I observed the difficulty under which my French colleagues in the society suffered when they endeavored to make abstracts of the laws of other states. It may be stated, I think, without fear of contradiction, that no body of men consisting entirely of one nation is capable of making a useful abstract of the laws of other nations. Probably the best collection of this kind is that of the "Société de Legislation Comparee" of Paris; and yet it is impossible for any New York lawyer to read over the abstract made of the laws of the state of New York for any one year without being struck by the fact that much of the most important legislation of the year is not referred to, whereas

importance is often given to laws of comparatively little significance.

II. AS REGARDS UTILIZATION OF MATERIAL.

It cannot be said that the labor of any such society as that of the Société de Legislation Comparee" has as yet been very fruitful in its results. Notwithstanding the carefulness with which every change made in the law and procedure in England is noted in the annual collection of this society, the points in which French procedure is most defective, as, for example, in its failure to provide for Injunction, Contempt of Court and Habeas Corpus, have received no attention at the hands of the legislature; and, on the other hand, the points in which English precedure might learn much from the simplicity of that prevailing in France have received similar inattention at the hands of the British Parliament. Again, the cumbrous procedure which prevails in the state of New York and in many of our other states, the uselessness of which cannot be appreciated by a American lawyer by anything less than actual practice in such a tribunal as that of the French Tribunal of Commerce where there is practically no procedure at all, has remained unsimplified by any lesson to be drawn from French procedure. Indeed, it may be said that unless there is some important interest engaged in pushing legislation, as in the case of the enactment of the Employer's Liability Act in France, which undoubtedly borrowed some provisions from the English act, the legislature of no one nation seems to learn much from the experience of its neighbors.

A question arises whether any plan can be proposed which will diminish the two difficulties above mentioned, and whether the present Congress is a fitting opportunity for the submission of such a plan.

PROPOSITION AS REGARDS COLLECTION OF MATERIAL.

There is in almost every civilized country in the world and in almost every state of the Union, either a law university, a

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »